The Telegraph out of Calcutta India reports[1] that resistance grows in India’s rural areas to a government scheme deploying sterilization vans.

Deputy director of India’s Health Department’s family planning division Subodh Jaiswal said that women in rural Bihar “are very conservative and it is difficult to convince them to take part in a sterilisation programme.”

The article mentions that the department launched a mobile sterilization van “to promote sterilisation for women in Patna district.” Jaiswal stated that “only 200 women have been sterilised through this project.”

“Bihar”, the article goes on to say, “needs rigorous family planning measures to check the unbridled growth of the population.”

“(…) women in rural parts of the state are very conservative. To convince them of our sterilisation programme was very challenging.”, Jaiswal said.

“The van has two nurses who administer the process. They try to convince women who have at least one child to opt for the sterilisation.”

According to the officials, the mobile sterilization van was part of a government scheme attempting to “motivate female sterilization”. They admitted that the project has failed miserably because of “conservative” sentiments among women.

“There has been a sharp decline in the number of people who availed of the scheme in the last fiscal.”, they told the Telegraph.

“In 2010-2011, 10,367 women had availed of the benefits of the Adarsh Dampati Yojana; in 2011-2012, only 7,700 women took advantage of the service,” Jaiswal stated.

These numbers prove that these sterilization vans are meeting with resistance from women in rural areas. The use of such mobile sterilization units is not the invention of overzealous health officials in India. It has been developed by World Bank- and UN personnel worrying about population growth in developing (and developed) nations. As early as the 1980s, the World Bank suggests using “sterilization vans” and “camps” to facilitate its sterilization policies for the third world. The1984 World Development Report[2] also threatens nations who are slow in implementing the bank’s population policies with “drastic steps, less compatible with individual choice and freedom.”

The report is devoted entirely to the World Bank’s long-term strategies in regards to population control and does not shy away from proposing the most draconian methods in order to depopulate the planet:

“Male and female sterilization and IUDs can be made more readily available through mobile facilities (such as sterilization vans in Thailand) or periodic “camps” (such as vasectomy and tubectomy-camps in India and IUD “safaris” in Indonesia)”, the report states.

To illustrate how serious the World Bank is in achieving the overall strategy objectives on population control, the report makes use of outright threats:

“Population policy has a long lead time; other development policies must adapt in the meantime. Inaction today forecloses options tomorrow, in overall development strategy and in future population policy. Worst of all, inaction today could mean that more drastic steps, less compatible with individual choice and freedom, will seem necessary tomorrow to slow population growth.”

In the preface, then President of the World Bank and 1985 Bilderberg attendee, A.W. Clausen stated:

“(…) although the direct costs of The World Bank programs to reduce population growth are not large, a greater commitment by the international community is sorely needed to assist developing countries in the great challenge of slowing population growth.”

“(…) governments can use incentives and disincentives to signal their policy on family size”, the report continues. “Through incentives, society as a whole compensates those couples willing to forgo the private benefits of an additional child, helping to close the gap between private and social gains to high fertility.”

To give an adequate illustration of the World Bank’s preference for all-out government control over the people, and their intent on meddling in people’s personal decisions, the following quote will suffice (page 107):

“By taxing and spending in ways that provide couples with specific incentives and disincentives to limit their fertility, government policy can also affect fertility in the short run. Government can offer “rewards” for women who defer pregnancy; it can compensate people who undergo sterilization for loss of work and travel costs; and it can provide insurance and old-age security schemes for parents who restrict the size of their families.

Each of these public policies works through signals which influence individual and family decisions- when to marry, whether to use contraception, how long to send children to school, and life expectancy, and whether and how much family members work.”

Under the header “Incentives and disincentives” (page 121), the World Bank proposes several more examples of government interference in the affairs of free humanity:

“To complement family planning services and social programs that help to reduce fertility, governments may want to consider financial and other incentives and disincentives as additional ways of encouraging parents to have fewer children. Incentives may be defined as payments given to an individual, couple, or group to delay or limit child-bearing or to use contraceptives. (…). Disincentives are the withholding of social benefits from those whose family size exceeds a desired norm.”
The report uses the example of China to make clear such measures can be highly successful if governments would only be willing to implement them:

“With the possible exception of China, efforts to raise the age at marriage by persuasion and edict have not been particularly successful.”

“In China the birth rate at the end of 1982 was estimated to be nineteen per 1,000 people, down from forty in the 1960s. The current figure, based on birth registrations rather than on a census, may slightly understate the actual birth rate; but it would still be well below current rates in South Asia, Africa, and most of Latin America.”

On page 124, the World Bank report further marvels at the Chinese government’s accomplishments:

“China has the most comprehensive set of incentives and disincentives, designed (most recently) to promote the one-child family. Since the early 1970s women undergoing various types of fertility-related operations have been entitled to paid leave: in urban areas fourteen days for induced abortion; ten days for tubal ligation; two to three days for insertion or removal of an IUD; and in the case of postnatal sterilization, seven extra days over the normal fifty-six of paid maternity leave.”

Making clear that the overall World Bank population reduction strategy must be implemented in a country-specific manner, the report states:

“The specific policy agenda for each country depends on its political culture, on the nature of the problem it faces, and on what it has already accomplished.”

What does have to be global, according to the World Bank, is continuing urbanization: people nicely locked up in massive townships. The report explains:
“Living in small towns does less to reduce fertility than does living in larger cities. That many of these changes take time to have an effect only underlines the need to begin them now. At the same time, other measures that complement and speed socioeconomic change can hasten a decline in fertility.”

This report is completely in step with the strategies outlined by the UN, the Rockefeller Foundation, Ford Foundation, World Health Organization and IMF as they move to depopulate the earth in a consorted global effort. The pretexts for fertility reduction given throughout the report are “sustainable development” and “poverty reduction”. The truth is, so states the World Bank itself, to introduce and further develop “policy measures to increase people’s welfare as well as (and as a means) to reduce fertility.”

According to a report[3] out of India earlier this year, several victims of forced sterilization by state officials have come forward, providing bone-chilling evidence of widespread sterilization practices in Madhya Pradesh, a huge province in India’s heartland.

An item carried by India Today, under the header “conned into sterilization[4]” features no less than 8 victims of Indian government officials, who routinely round up citizens and sterilize them just to meet the state’s family planning targets. As it turns out, it’s not just the state’s targets they are meeting. Every time some chicken-necked eugenicist grabs a surgical knife, it is the desires of the UN and World Health Organization he’s satisfying.

The victims interviewed include a 98-year old man and an 80-year old man, both of whom were forced to undergo vasectomy. Government officials threatened the men with withholding their social benefits if they refused.

“While these men got to live the life they wanted till a ripe old age, 24-year old Jamuna Kori of Sidhi district was not so lucky. One day, he was just picked up from a road by two men, sterilised and left on the highway again.”

The article, written by correspondent Rahul Singh, also features a woman who was drugged into submission:

“They gave me something to drink and I fell unconscious. When I woke up I realized they had operated on me. I want an inquiry”.

The video also shows several mentally challenged individuals, who were not even threatened but just directly operated upon.

The clip also features a 25 year old man who took his 2 year old son for an anti-rabies vaccine after the boy was bitten by a dog. The doctors told the man they would only treat his son if the father would undergo sterilization. The Telegraphcarried an article[5] about this case, in which the young father said:

“My son’s life was more important. I was told private hospitals charge 900 Rupees (£11) for each injection,” he told The Indian Express.”

“In 2010”, states a 2011 article[6] out of New Delhi, “Madhya Pradesh achieved a record sterilization target of 645,000, luring villagers with freebies such as mobile phones, two-wheelers and gold coins to undergo sterilization.”

But now, in 2012, it seems the eugenicists in the UN are loosing patience as now they just order people picked up from the road to have them drugged and sterilized.

In an ad[7] put out by the UNFPA (the United Nations Population Fund) for the job of family planning consultant (7 vacancies) the candidates are being informed about the reasons for more hands:

“Given that the presence of the private sector is marginal, there is major client load on the public health system. Hence, if sterilization services in Madhya Pradesh have to pick up, public health system has to gear itself and other options of public–private partnership, wherever feasible, will have to be explored.”

Another piece of evidence that the sterilisation-efforts contributed to the state is actually being coordinated by the UNFPA:

“It is proposed to have a dedicated technical person in the office of divisional joint director, as divisional family planning consultant, supported by UNFPA. The consultant would be physically located in the office of divisional joint director health services and will work under direct administrative and technical control of joint director health services.”

In fact, these practices are being conducted worldwide- always with the help of the same old modus operandi: the World Bank and their UN partners constrict sovereign nations to the point of them accepting trading-“privileges”. In order to safeguard a seat around the transnational table, these nations- often struggling with widespread poverty- accept every and any condition by the lender of last resort (IMF, World Bank). These conditions are far from secret. They are actually right out in the open. This latest Indian horror story is further evidence of the fact that not the Indian state is the initiator of these forced sterilization policies, as the article by Rahul Singh argues. It is the UNFPA rather, the enforcement arm of the eugenicists, which both sets the standards, provides the technology, recruits the medical personnel, and- on a global level- enforces these sterilization policies through binding treaties and other supranational strangleholds.

In the context of the 2011 UN’s World Population Day several developing nations were quick to pledge allegiance to the eugenic deity. In the east-Indian state of Bihar, officials put out the announcement[8] that:

“The Bihar government will soon formulate a new population control policy. The policy will be framed in collaboration with the United Nations Population Fund (UNPF).”

Another Indian state, Karnataka, had President Gladys Almeida “observe World Population Day” at which event she told[9] local government employees:

“There is a need to create an awareness on the need for population control.”

Another individual present said:

“as the population increases, nature takes its own method to control it.”

Another compliant nation, Pakistan, had their Federal Minister for Population Welfare Firdous Aashiq Awan announce[10] that:

“The government is taking serious measures to control population growth in the country.”

The government in Islmabad even recruits religious leaders (a trick stolen from the UN[11]) in order to sell population control to the masses:

“(…) religious leaders are being empowered. For the first time, ‘Imam Masjid’ is being made a partner in population Welfare programmes. He would act as a social mobilizer, she (Awan) added.”

These pledges of allegiance to the UN and their set goals of reducing human numbers are not exclusively made by developing countries. Developed countries have accustomed themselves with the same line of reasoning. The only difference is that, as of yet, the language has been more “friendly”, masking the true purpose of the scientific dictatorship implemented.